Skip to content

Does using ChatGPT change your brain activity? Study sparks debate

Technology
8 8 99
  • Scientists warn against reading too much into a small experiment generating a lot of buzz.

  • Scientists warn against reading too much into a small experiment generating a lot of buzz.

    Does walking change your brain activity?

  • Scientists warn against reading too much into a small experiment generating a lot of buzz.

    It definitely does in my experience. I have intentionally used it for specific tasks for defined periods of time. And then stopped and used only my normal online search tools and a text editor without AI assistance. My projects were written concept development, plus some light coding to create utility scripts.

    From just my own experience there is definitely a real cognitive hazard associated with using LLMs at all, for all but the most specialized tasks where an LLM is really warranted.

    The scripts worked fine, as they were quite simple python utilities for some data cleaning, so I see a use there. But I found that the concepts never caught fire in my imagination, whereas usually a good share of concepts developed manually turn into something that gets a deeper treatment, even a prototype design at least.

  • Does walking change your brain activity?

    There seems to hundreds of studies on that and there seems to be a fairly uniform "Yes" and "More than you would guess", etc.

    Here is one: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3233/ADR-220062

  • Does walking change your brain activity?

    yea, bumps more blood. You no need more

  • It definitely does in my experience. I have intentionally used it for specific tasks for defined periods of time. And then stopped and used only my normal online search tools and a text editor without AI assistance. My projects were written concept development, plus some light coding to create utility scripts.

    From just my own experience there is definitely a real cognitive hazard associated with using LLMs at all, for all but the most specialized tasks where an LLM is really warranted.

    The scripts worked fine, as they were quite simple python utilities for some data cleaning, so I see a use there. But I found that the concepts never caught fire in my imagination, whereas usually a good share of concepts developed manually turn into something that gets a deeper treatment, even a prototype design at least.

    I find myself thinking harder and learning more when I use AI. I'm constantly thinking what I can do to double check it. I constantly look at what it writes and consider whether it did the task I asked it to do or the task I need done.

    I'm on track to rewrite 25000 lines of code from one testing framework to another in 3 days, and I started out not knowing either framework and not having really written in typescript in years. And I'm pretty sure I can write the tests from scratch in my primary project that is just getting started.

    This one anecdote doesn't disprove a study, of course, but it seems to me that the findings are not universally true for some reason. Whether it's a matter of technique or brain chemistry, I don't know. Ideally, people could be taught to use AI to improve their thinking rather than supplant it.

  • Scientists warn against reading too much into a small experiment generating a lot of buzz.

    Everything you do changes your brain activity.

    This isn’t about using ChatGPT broadly, but specifically about the difference between writing an essay with the help of an LLM versus doing it without. And in this case, I think it all comes down to how you use it. If you just have it write the essay for you, then of course it won’t stimulate your brain to the same extent - that’s like hiring someone to go to the gym for you.

    Personally, the way I use it to help with my writing is by doing all the writing myself first. Only after that do I let it check for grammatical errors and help improve the clarity and flow by making minor structural adjustments - while keeping the tone and message of my original draft intact.

    For me, the purpose of writing is to convert abstract thoughts into language and pass that information along, hoping the reader understands it well enough that it forms the same idea in their mind. If ChatGPT can help untangle my word salad and make that process more effective, I welcome it.

  • I find myself thinking harder and learning more when I use AI. I'm constantly thinking what I can do to double check it. I constantly look at what it writes and consider whether it did the task I asked it to do or the task I need done.

    I'm on track to rewrite 25000 lines of code from one testing framework to another in 3 days, and I started out not knowing either framework and not having really written in typescript in years. And I'm pretty sure I can write the tests from scratch in my primary project that is just getting started.

    This one anecdote doesn't disprove a study, of course, but it seems to me that the findings are not universally true for some reason. Whether it's a matter of technique or brain chemistry, I don't know. Ideally, people could be taught to use AI to improve their thinking rather than supplant it.

    But do you also sometimes leave out AI for steps the AI often does for you, like the conceptualisation or the implementation?
    Would it be possible for you to do these steps as efficiently as before the use of AI? Would you be able to spot the mistakes the AI makes in these steps, even months or years along those lines?

    The main issue I have with AI being used in tasks is that it deprives you from using logic by applying it to real life scenarios, the thing we excel at. It would be better to use AI in the opposite direction you are currently use it as: develop methods to view the works critically. After all, if there is one thing a lot of people are bad at, it's thorough critical thinking. We just suck at knowing of all edge cases and how we test for them.

    Let the AI come up with unit tests, let it be the one that questions your work, in order to get a better perspective on it.

  • DM me on Spotify: Spotify launches a messaging feature.

    Technology technology
    134
    1
    218 Stimmen
    134 Beiträge
    5 Aufrufe
    F
    Just did a couple of tests and Qobuz seems to play gaplessly on my phone.
  • 21 Stimmen
    8 Beiträge
    13 Aufrufe
    I
    What lawsuit? What are you talking about?
  • UK Plans AI Experiment on Children Seeking Asylum

    Technology technology
    12
    1
    79 Stimmen
    12 Beiträge
    52 Aufrufe
    A
    Companies that tested their technology in a handful of supermarkets, pubs, and on websites set them to predict whether a person looks under 25, not 18, allowing a wide error margin for algorithms that struggle to distinguish a 17-year-old from a 19-year-old. AI face scans were never designed for children seeking asylum, and risk producing disastrous, life-changing errors. Algorithms identify patterns in the distance between nostrils and the texture of skin; they cannot account for children who have aged prematurely from trauma and violence. They cannot grasp how malnutrition, dehydration, sleep deprivation, and exposure to salt water during a dangerous sea crossing might profoundly alter a child’s face. Goddamn, this is horrible. Imagine leaving shitty AI to determine the fate of this girl : 'Psychologically broken,' 8-year-old Sama loses her hair
  • 371 Stimmen
    40 Beiträge
    362 Aufrufe
    E
    Under the regulations, which are set to take effect on Oct. 10, platforms will have to label political ads, disclosing who paid for them, and what campaign, referendum or legislative process they’re connected to Oh yeah they sound really unworkable, who could possibly expect meta to take this very basic information from their advertisers and then display it in a small text box. Of course not seeing the ads is even better so I don't think anyone will complain.
  • Tech support 'trained monkey’ fixed problem with two fingers

    Technology technology
    7
    1
    31 Stimmen
    7 Beiträge
    91 Aufrufe
    S
    I can understand why some programs only allow a single copy to be opened at once, something like email makes sense. However on Linux they got this right... if you try to open a program that is already running, it switches to the screen that program is on and restores the program window to the desktop. There's no guessing why the program "won't open", it just makes the logical choice that you want to see it. Heh that reminds me of another detail from that call... the guy also wasn't willing to reboot his computer (which would have solved the problem as well), but berated me for not knowing what I was doing for making the suggestion. Dude, it's Windows, things break constantly and a reboot generally resolves the issue.
  • 68 Stimmen
    4 Beiträge
    56 Aufrufe
    O
    This is also going to be used against the general populace. Setting up the Techno-Fuedal Surveillance state. The Militaries of the future will be policing their own countries more and more. Very soon the regular police will all have masks and blacked out helmets.
  • How not to lose your job to AI

    Technology technology
    16
    1
    9 Stimmen
    16 Beiträge
    153 Aufrufe
    rikudou@lemmings.worldR
    A nice "trick": After 4 or so responses where you can't get anywhere, start a new chat without the wrong context. Of course refine your question with whatever you have found out in the previous chat.
  • 65 Stimmen
    13 Beiträge
    142 Aufrufe
    semperverus@lemmy.worldS
    You want abliterated models, not distilled.